Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Roger, Yes, I think your derivation is legal and you have a similar example in the XML Schema Primer (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/#complexTfromSimpleT). I have found that the most reliable schema validator is XSV, which is available as a web service: http://www.w3.org/2000/06/webdata/xsv Why wouldn't give it a try ? Hope this helps, Eric "Roger L. Costello" wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > I have a question about deriving by extension from a user defined > simpleType. > > Suppose that I would like to create a schema for this: > > <cost currency="USD">41.95</cost> > > Here is one approach: > > <element name="cost"> > <complexType base="decimal" derivedBy="extension"> > <attribute name="currency" type="string" use="required"/> > </complexType> > </element> > > The disadvantage of this approach is that it allows <cost> to contain > any decimal value. Suppose that we want to restrict it to contain a > decimal value with no more than two digits to the right of the decimal > point. Here is a simpleType to define a restricted decimal: > > <simpleType name="money" base="decimal"> > <scale value="2"/> > </simpleType> > > Now, let me modify the above cost declaration to reference this new > type: > > <element name="cost"> > <complexType base="t:money" derivedBy="extension"> > <attribute name="currency" type="string" use="required"/> > </complexType> > </element> > > (Let's assume that "t" has been set to the targetNamespace) > > Is this second version of cost legal? Can we derive (by extension) from > a user defined simpleType? > > I have found that the Apache 1.2 parser does not accept the second > version, whereas it does accept the first version. /Roger -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric van der Vlist Dyomedea http://dyomedea.com http://xmlfr.org http://4xt.org http://ducotede.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
